patch to OST should have failed CI but did not

[Barak Korren]

On 7 May 2018 at 08:53, Yedidyah Bar David <didi at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 5:27 PM, Barak Korren <bkorren at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 6 May 2018 at 16:29, Yedidyah Bar David <didi at redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> See [1]. Pushed it to test [2], and with it it failed as expected [3].
> >> But check-patch didn't fail, and IIUC didn't run any sub-jobs for any
> >> suite, no idea why. I think that's a problem... Any idea?
> >>
> >
> > This is a known issue with the deployment files - since they are linked
> to
> > directly from the suits` 'LagoInitFile's, and not as symlinks in the
> suits`
> > directories, STDCI can tell which suits they belong to.
> >
> > We've discussed this before and decides to make symlinks - but I guess
> this
> > wasn't implemented yet. Gal, Daniel - any status update about the
> > implementation?
>
> Personally I prefer to get rid of all the symlinks.
>
> Each suite should have a configuration file in some format, that lists
> what lago init file(s) it uses, what test scenarios it runs, what deploy
> scripts, etc.
>
> I realize that I do not have the full picture and that real
> life is more complicated. But symlinks are not the solution.


I respectfully disagree.


> symlinks are
> designed to _hide_ the fact they are links,


that is a very poor kind of hiding considering everything shows up in 'ls
-l'


> not to serve as a configuration
> store.


They have been used for that in many systems including sysV init....


> Text files do the latter better, imo. They are easier to work with -
> easier to read and edit, both manually and by a program,


Manually - maybe - though 'ln -s' and 'rm' for a specific link can be
easier then navigating a big file
Automatically - hell no - most configuration files require a full blown
parser, and even if your file is simple enough to be reliably processed by
sed and awk, 'ln' and 'rm' are simpler.



> easier to track in
> git, etc.
>

Again, nope - putting different things in one file almost guarantees merge
conflicts down the line, these can almost never happen with symlinks.

I think that as a developer used to working with source - you seem to be
prone to the 'with a hammer everything looks like a nail' kind of bias.
What is easy for you to do with your IDE may seem to you to be universally
easy.

But all of this is besides the point - the suits being based on a simple
directory structure had allowed us to leverage simple and generic
pattern-based conditional execution capabilities in STDCI V2 to make
check-patch smartly run things in parallel. Getting this to work if the
configuration was based on some OST-specific format would have been much
harder, and would have probably required additional code both in OST and
STDCI.

-- 
Barak Korren
RHV DevOps team , RHCE, RHCi
Red Hat EMEA
redhat.com | TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. | redhat.com/trusted
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/infra/attachments/20180507/ab05891b/attachment.html>